Dynamics 365 Project Operations

Customers frequently encounter business scenarios where vendor credit notes are issued independently of any previously posted vendor invoice. Currently, Project Operations does not support posting such standalone credit notes, creating a gap in functionality compared to Finance & Operations (F&O), where users can create Purchase Orders (POs) with negative quantities or unit prices to handle these cases.

This limitation prevents customers from accurately reflecting vendor account updates and project-related financials when no invoice line exists. The inability to post standalone credit notes in Project Operations disrupts synchronization with F&O and hinders compliance with financial and project tracking requirements.

We propose enhancing Project Operations to allow posting vendor credit notes directly against projects, even when no linked vendor invoice line exists. This would ensure seamless integration with F&O, support accurate vendor account management, and accommodate real-world subcontracting and procurement workflows.

When a default dashboard is selected in Sales Hub, the same dashboard is automatically set in Project Operations. However, if that specific dashboard doesn't exist in Project Operations, the system reverts to its default dashboard.

Users should be able to set their preferred default dashboard in each application independently. This means they can select a sales-focused dashboard in Sales Hub, and when switching to Project Operations, have a different default dashboard tailored to job management.

For an expense category where the ‘Include in anti-corruption’ parameter is set to ‘Yes’ and the user has included an expense with that category on the Expense report from the mobile app; while submitting the expense report from the app, the system gives the below error and does not allow the user to submit such expense.

“The expense report contains an expense using an anti-corruption category. Ensure that the anti-corruption attestation is completed or use a different category.”

The Expense mobile app should provide an option to complete the anti-corruption attestation.

Actual Outcome:

Currently, when a project transaction is adjusted in Dynamics 365 Finance, the vendor's name and id from the original transaction is removed—even though the original transaction included this detail. This behavior differs between expense and item transactions, and neither case retains the vendor reference post-adjustment.

Expected Outcome:

The vendor's name and id from the original transaction should persist even after adjustment. This would ensure consistency across expense and item transactions and maintain the integrity of vendor-based reporting. Ideally, the system should retain the vendor reference in both the adjusted and reversing entries or at least provide a configuration option to preserve this metadata.

In the current Dynamics 365 behavior, the system allows a user to dissociate a task from a project contract line in Task Billing Setup even when that task is already linked to confirmed vendor invoices and actuals. This dissociation happens without any warning, validation, or system block.

This can result in:

• Confirmed vendor invoices being reversed and reposted with no associated contract line, breaking the financial traceability and project integrity.

• Errors when trying to relink those tasks later, such as:“A few or all of the selected tasks could not be associated to this Quote/Contract line.”

In contrast, associating a task to a contract line is strictly validated. But the reverse action (dissociation) is not protected, making it easy for users to unintentionally corrupt billing links on live projects.

Proposed Solution:

• Add a validation check or user warning when dissociating a task that has existing actuals or confirmed vendor invoices.

• Optionally, block dissociation if such links exist.

• Include audit logging to record who performed the dissociation and when.

This change will protect against data loss, maintain billing consistency, and bring the same level of control to dissociation as exists for association. It will greatly help in production environments where project and billing data integrity is critical.

The current report format for Project Operations' Copilot-generated status reports is locked in, except for the summary section. It would be good to include a few solution parameters where users could select some of the content for the external/internal reports, add company logo, specific disclaimers and assumptions, etc.

Current Behavior:

When creating a Project Task assigned to a Generic Resource, a Project Team Member is automatically generated. I then generate and submit a Resource Requirement for that Project Team Member. Using the Schedule Board, I book an actual resource for the requirement. As expected, the "Assigned To" field on the Project Task is updated automatically from the Generic Resource to the Booked Resource.

However, if I later modify the booking and assign it to a different resource, the "Assigned To" field on the Project Task does not update to reflect this change. It appears that the system only updates the task assignment during the initial booking. Any subsequent changes to the booking are not synchronized with the Project Task.

Requested Enhancement:

The "Assigned To" field on the Project Task should stay in sync with the related Resource Booking. If the assigned resource on a booking is changed, the task assignment should update accordingly - just as it does when the initial booking is created.

This improvement would ensure consistency between resource bookings and task assignments, leading to more accurate project planning and resource tracking.

As a Project Manager, I would like to prompt Co-Pilot to surface resource availability based on Bookings. Example: Show me how many "Technicians" are available in "New York" between August 1st and August 15th 2025.

When attempting to split project transactions to subprojects using 2 decimal precisions, and totaling 100.00%, receiving the error "Total quantity for all adjusted lines must equal the quantity in the original line, This is when the Qy to be distributed are values ​​with 2 decimals,

Customer manages hundreds of transactions with amounts rounded to two decimal places. It is necessary to allocate these expenses across multiple subprojects, sometimes >100 subprojects, each of which will be capitalized as Fixed Assets. 

In eDiscovery, when redacting a document that was originally attached to an email, the redacted version is correctly exported as a PDF. However, the original email is exported with the unredacted version of the document still attached.

This behavior is problematic. Documents requiring redaction contain sensitive information that must be withheld for legal or compliance reasons. Including both the redacted and unredacted versions in the export undermines the purpose of redaction and exposes the organization to significant risk and liability.

To prevent the unintended disclosure of sensitive data, the email that contains the redacted document should be exported:

• As a PDF file without the unredacted document (attached)
• As a MSG file with the attachment removed